Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Desktop\s+Dyno\s+Fun\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Desktop\s+Dyno\s+Fun\s*$/: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "Frank Marrone" <itswonderful@attbi.com>; Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2003 19:38:00 -0800; I've been playing around with Desktop Dyno 2000 and see some "interesting" results from trying different component mixes. One thing I don't understand has to do with engine displacement changes. When; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00009.html (8,319 bytes)
2. RE: Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "Scott Hutchinson" <shutchin@netjets.com>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 07:49:05 -0500; My 2 cents. It may have to do with flame travel speed. The larger cylinder bore cannot propagate the flame as quickly as the small bore and therefore efficiency falls off at higher rpm. This is why m; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00014.html (9,258 bytes)
3. RE: Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "Frank Marrone" <itswonderful@attbi.com>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 09:15:05 -0800; Scott, the only problem with this is that I'm changing stroke to make the difference in displacement while leaving the bore size at 4.030". I confirmed that it is not related to rod ratio. I built th; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00016.html (8,162 bytes)
4. RE: Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "Bob Palmer" <rpalmer@ucsd.edu>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 15:57:36 -0800; Interesting question. Here's how I think it should be analyzed. To a first approximation, engine horsepower scales as displacement times rpm. That is, a 400 ci engine at 2,000 rpm will have about th; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00018.html (8,281 bytes)
5. RE: Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "Derek White" <derekw@sltnet.lk>; Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 12:46:54 +0500; Hi Frank and everyone, Have you tried asking the software company? They might just be wrong. Sorry Bob, I don't really follow how your argument explains why the shorter stroke engines make more horse; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00019.html (9,328 bytes)
6. RE: Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "Frank Marrone" <itswonderful@attbi.com>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 23:10:37 -0800; Bob, thanks. This resolves some of the difference but not all. If I run three different cases, all the same displacement but with different rod and stroke combinations, then the HP and Torque curves; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00020.html (9,167 bytes)
7. RE: Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "Frank Marrone" <itswonderful@attbi.com>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 23:12:24 -0800; That was my first thought, it is a pretty cheap piece of software and you usually get what you pay for.; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00021.html (7,676 bytes)
8. RE: Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "Frank Marrone" <itswonderful@attbi.com>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 23:33:44 -0800; In the simulations the difference in power between the long and short stroke cases increase exponentially with RPM. This would be consistent with the trends of the frictional losses. Maybe this IS th; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00022.html (7,542 bytes)
9. RE: Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "Bob Palmer" <rpalmer@ucsd.edu>; Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 08:49:49 -0800; I was pretty short on explanation. I'm considered an engine fundamentally as a black box that converts fuel/air into work. So many cfm of fuel/air go in and so much horsepower comes out. This should; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00023.html (7,901 bytes)
10. RE: Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "Bob Palmer" <rpalmer@ucsd.edu>; Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 08:49:48 -0800; Now we're getting somewhere. The program may actually be more sophisticated than you expected. It didn't need to be built from scratch; the equations including parasitic losses (friction) have alrea; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00024.html (8,067 bytes)
11. RE: Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "Frank Marrone" <itswonderful@attbi.com>; Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 11:04:25 -0800; Bob, actually the program does show that the long stroke combinations make more low end torque. The difference was small in the cases I tried last night but when I exaggerate the stroke spreads you c; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00025.html (9,275 bytes)
12. Re: Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "DrMayf" <drmayf@teknett.com>; Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 17:29:26 -0800; Interesting! Have you all looked at my web site? I have an analysis of rod ratio for lots of items there. My conclusion is that it really doesn't do an awful lot for you unless you are a ProStock cre; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00027.html (10,349 bytes)
13. RE: Desktop Dyno Fun (score: 1): Author: "Frank Marrone" <itswonderful@attbi.com>; Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 18:11:21 -0800; For what it is worth, the users manual for the desktop dyno software says that it does not consider rod ratio as an input because the designers of the program feel it does not effect power output. I; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00030.html (8,248 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 13
Page: [1]